mitnick-digest Saturday, September 26 1998 Volume 01 : Number 166 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 12:47:10 -0400 From: Dan Sissman Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack     Not that the HFG vs. NYT discussion needs more fuel, but. . .     When the idea of corporations was first advanced, the rules were a lot different.  A corporation received the status of artificial-person-with-limited-liability by acting as a public trust.  A corporation had to have a charter approved by the government, and the government had teh absolute right to dissolve a corporation at any time if it found the public good was not being served.  Somewhere along the line, the rules shifted heavily in favor of the corporations.  Now, in exchange for a nominal incorporation fee, corporations appear to have an absolute right to exist, regardless of whether they serve the public good or not.     I would argue that this shift in power, absent any corresponding legal measures to restore the balance to the people, justifies, even necessitaites, extralegal action by people against corporations under certain circumstances.     Ponder:  Does the oppressive Indonesian regime in East Timor have the right to an unhacked website?  (I realize this falls outside the jurisdiction of the laws of eth United States, but go with it).  Is it *ever* right for someone to hack someone else's web page? If so, what circumstances justify such action? - -- Dan Sissman, amateur triviaphile            Free Kevin Mitnick! http://www.albany.net/~dsissman             http://www.kevinmitnick.com   ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 13:18:56 -0400 From: Dan Sissman Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack   Caliban Tiresias Darklock wrote: > I think terrorism is an excellent description of what they did, myself. > They took action against a perceived power structure by force for the > purpose of making a political statement. (I don't know if terrorism > involves violence by definition, and I don't feel like looking it up. It > would seem reasonable from my perspective to define it either way, > depending on the individual biases of the etymologist, but I think the > above definition -- which just feels right to me -- is probably pretty close.)     Well, that's your call, but it doesn't feel right to me.  When the Chicago Seven smuggled a pig into the Democratic National Convention in 1968, I don't think they were practicing terrorism.     Once upon a time, the New York Times illegally published the Pentagon Papers because they thought it was the right thing to do.  In a way, they forcibly seized part of the power structure (i.e. the right of the U.S. government to classify information related to the national defense) and made a hell of a statement.  Was *that* terrorism?  Quite the contrary, in my view.     I think violence, or the threat thereof, is an inherent element of terrorism.  To pigeonhole web-page hacking with blowing up planes and buildings does nothing but trivialize the suffering of the victims of *real* terrorist acts.  If Timothy McVeigh had hacked the Murrah Building website, would he still deserve a death sentence?  (I realize some on this list may feel he doesn't deserve one anyway, but that's a separate issue.)   - -- Dan Sissman, amateur triviaphile            Free Kevin Mitnick! http://www.albany.net/~dsissman             http://www.kevinmitnick.com   ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:23:25 -0700 (PDT) From: rOTTEN Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack On Fri, 25 Sep 1998, Caliban Tiresias Darklock wrote: > >what they did is in a completely different ethical realm than the > >"terrorism" they were accused of in a certain column. > > I think terrorism is an excellent description of what they did, myself. > They took action against a perceived power structure by force for the > purpose of making a political statement. (I don't know if terrorism > involves violence by definition, and I don't feel like looking it up. It > would seem reasonable from my perspective to define it either way, > depending on the individual biases of the etymologist, but I think the > above definition -- which just feels right to me -- is probably pretty close.) The definition does indeed include violence and threats. So, yeah, if you subsitute "force" in your definition with "violence and threats", you'd be on the money...only HFG didn't use violence. Anyway, I'll shut up now. <..rOTTEN..> nobody move, nobody get hurt error187(1) critical failure ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 14:00:25 -0700 From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack On 11:43 AM 9/25/98 -0400, I personally witnessed Dan Sissman jumping up to say: > >Caliban Tiresias Darklock wrote: > >> Negativland did this with Dispepsi, and that was laudable and commendable. >> They composed a complete album, start to finish, out of Pepsi commercials. > >Not so. The album also contains their readings of internal Pepsi memos, >interviews with executives about the "Cola Wars", call in talk shows, and >original songs with no Pepsi samples whatsoever. The advertisments themselves >make up a significant portion, but not the totality of teh album. If they did, it wouldn't be fair use, now would it? ;) All these disclaimers, man, all these disclaimers. "They composed a complete album from start to finish using a large number of Pepsi commercials in conjunction with spoken word and original musical and lyrical material?" Heck, "A large number" to some people means three. James Brown complains that people in hip-hop and rap tend to use "a lot" of his music in theirs, and on many -- I might even go so far as to say most -- occasions that "lot" is some or all of a ten-second sample taken from the last fifteen seconds of the 1963 song "Funky Drummer", which was (and pardon me if you're a James Brown fan) a real suckwad of a song. That last fifteen seconds isn't "a lot" of a seven minute song by any definition I've ever heard, and it isn't like the song as a whole had much redeeming value to most people. >No argument >here that it's brilliant, though. Loved it. I think of it every time I see or hear a Pepsi commercial. The entire Pepsi ad campaign doesn't mean Pepsi to me anymore, it means Negativland. They have hijacked an entire multi-million dollar international ad campaign. Now THAT is a hack worthy of the hacking hall of fame if I ever heard one. And it was all one hundred percent legal. :) >> Forgive me if I consider HFG >> crude, primitive, and barbaric. I didn't find them admirable, I found them >> offensive. Okay, they're literate. I admire that. > >Well, they spent 15 minutes looking through Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, >anyway. Doesn't mean they actually read any of the works they cited. "Con >Air" began with a quotation from Dostoyevsky. "Literate" these days would include knowing what BFQ is in the first place. If you recognise the names Bartlett, Roget, and Dewey, I think that qualifies you as literate. It's worth noting, however, that "literate" and "smart" aren't the same thing. My personal favorite test of literacy is to hand someone Roget's and ask him to look up synonyms for some specific word. If he acts really confused when he discovers it isn't alphabetical, he's something rather less than literate. ;) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Caliban Tiresias Darklock | "I'm not sorry or Darklock Communications | ashamed of who I PGP Key AD21EE50 at | really am." FREE KEVIN MITNICK! | - Charles Manson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 15:19:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Support Services Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack > My personal favorite test of literacy is to hand someone Roget's and > ask him to look up synonyms for some specific word. If he acts really > confused when he discovers it isn't alphabetical, he's something > rather less than literate. ;) What about Bartlett's? If you handed me Bartlett's, I'd ask for the heavy-cling syrup to go along with it. I guess that makes me illiterate. I am a stranger to mainstream education, and mainstream literacy. I am a loner. Few people travel my paths. Few are willing to leave their comfort zone. I discover... on my own, without the use of a textbook (as opposed to rediscover). I create, without the use of a template (as opposed to recreate). Am I illiterate? I wouldn't know how to use Roget's. Never opened it, and probably never will. Just like you, however, I can learn how to use it. Oh, also, I can spell... without the use of a spell-checker. - ---- FREE KEVIN MITNICK!! (regularly $19.95) while supplies last! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 15:44:36 -0700 From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack On 12:47 PM 9/25/98 -0400, I personally witnessed Dan Sissman jumping up to say: > > I would argue that this shift in power, absent any corresponding legal measures >to restore the balance to the people, justifies, even necessitaites, extralegal >action by people against corporations under certain circumstances. I don't want to say those circumstances don't exist -- certainly I can imagine things that would demand people take extralegal action, in the name of justice and fairness -- but I don't think they exist with the NYT. It's a speech issue. Freedom of speech doesn't subsume *equality* of speech. Some people speak more effectively than others, for whatever reason, and the NYT certainly reaches more people than many other papers. But the fact that some entity is powerful does not necessarily make that entity Bad; Embry Rucker, a wealthy private citizen in Virginia, is certainly powerful. But he operates a volunteer homeless shelter in Reston, located quite conveniently near the social services office, the public library, and public transportation. It is beyond a doubt the most effectively placed and operated shelter I have ever seen; it is clean, in good repair, and operates toward the betterment of its residents to help them reenter the workforce and society. I have been both a resident and a volunteer there. I can and do offer great appreciation to Embry Rucker for this shelter, without which I might very well still be hanging out on a street corner asking people for spare change. Another excellent example is Ross Perot, who operates EDS. EDS is a sweatshop; they work the living hell out of each and every person there, and you could even claim they violate many basic human rights. But Perot goes farther above and beyond the call of duty to take care of his people than anyone else -- he will expect you to give him one thousand percent, but when you give him that thousand percent you can rest assured he will go much more than the extra mile; when EDS personnel were trapped in some mideastern country and tension rose to the point that they weren't safe, Perot hired professional mercenaries to fly an unsanctioned chopper over the borders and bring his people home. I cannot think of even *one* other company that would do that. Power corrupts, indeed. We know this. The concerns of power become more and more limited to the maintenance and enhancement of that power. But corrupted and corrupt are two different things; there are plenty of people out there who aren't exactly Mother Teresa, but aren't exactly Heinrich Himmler either. > Ponder: Does the oppressive Indonesian regime in East Timor have the right to >an unhacked website? (I realize this falls outside the jurisdiction of the laws of >eth United States, but go with it). By U.S. law, if we were to extend it to include East Timor, they do have this right. By international law, I wouldn't know right offhand. By the pure virtue of what is and isn't acceptable, they have the right to say whatever they want to on their website, and thus *not* to say what they DON'T want to. It is certainly acceptable on the web for people to acquire web space in which they can say whatever *they* like, but acquiring that web space by force from someone else is quite simply theft and can arguably be described as terrorism. >Is it *ever* right for someone to hack someone >else's web page? I would say no. I'm sure there are people who disagree, but I think hacking web sites is just quite simply unacceptable. (Part of that is because I run a big one, and if someone hacked it I would have a LOT of work on my hands putting it back together.) We all need to live together and get along to some degree, and that means we need to have boundaries. I think those boundaries should include our internet presence as well as our physical presence; we often try to have it both ways and say that the internet is a cybernetic realm where we can transcend our physical limitations, but then limit even more fiercely the spiritual freedoms and basic human rights that we often take for granted (especially in America). There's no denying that there are differences. Certainly the internet is more of an urban environment than I remember in its early days, but I miss the times when the net was like a small town; a place where you could leave your door not only unlocked, but open, and people would still knock and wait for you to answer before they came in. I don't have a problem with closing my door, but I object to the suggestion that I need a four-foot steel vault with a time lock and retinal scanner. If people aren't trying to break into my site, I don't need to secure it. I think that's basic human courtesy. Sure, darkside hackers have created good; look at the computer security field. If it weren't for hackers, who would need it, right? But I can't help but wonder, when I look at it... all of those computer security people are busy working very hard to keep data that already exists from going anywhere, and they're often very smart. And I wonder if maybe the world wouldn't be better if those people could invest their effort in things like building a free operating system that's compatible with Windows NT. I know, it will never happen, because people have to pay the bills. But look at Linux. Unix was more expensive than NT will ever be until free compatible alternatives showed up. There are so many better things we could do than go out and harass people because we don't like them. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Caliban Tiresias Darklock | "I'm not sorry or Darklock Communications | ashamed of who I PGP Key AD21EE50 at | really am." FREE KEVIN MITNICK! | - Charles Manson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 17:23:03 -0600 From: "Kevin Joubert" Subject: Re: [mitnick] has there been any response? I got a response from my congressman in Colorado. It was not a form letter. I was a personalized letter and it actually looks like they did some research on Mitnick before they replied. The letter included some info about what Kevin was charged with and how much damage his is accused of causing. It was basically unsympathetic but at least it wasn't a form letter. - -----Original Message----- From: teo82@ix.netcom.com To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 8:37 PM Subject: [mitnick] has there been any response? >I have sent several letters to my senator and my reps, but have yet to recieve any reply not even >a form letter. i sent the first letter almost two weeks ago and I'm quite mad that i didn't get a >reply. anyone else not get replies from their congress person. > >Thomas E. O'Grady A.K.A. Crazed Dante > >Teo82@ix.netcom.com or Rascal14@aol.com > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 16:46:47 -0700 From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack On 03:19 PM 9/25/98 -0700, I personally witnessed Support Services jumping up to say: > >> My personal favorite test of literacy is to hand someone Roget's and >> ask him to look up synonyms for some specific word. If he acts really >> confused when he discovers it isn't alphabetical, he's something >> rather less than literate. ;) > >What about Bartlett's? If you handed me Bartlett's, I'd ask >for the heavy-cling syrup to go along with it. I guess that >makes me illiterate. I try very hard to avoid the word "illiterate" when speaking about this type of literacy. "Literate" in the sense of being able to read is the type of literacy where "illiterate" is generally used, and as a result most people associate illiteracy with stupidity. Correct or not, it's the way people see it. (Thus your reaction.) "Literate" in the sense of having read a large part of the existing body of classical literature, on the other hand, does not necessarily indicate intelligence -- nor does its absence indicate a lack thereof. Lots of people read Shakespeare and don't understand a word of it. They'll happily quote Shakespeare's "What a piece of work is man!" speech, getting several of the words wrong, having entirely the wrong meter and rhythm to their speech, mispronouncing words, and so forth. Literate? Yeah. (Assuming they didn't memorise it from that Star Trek episode.) Smart? Hell, no. Lots of people get snobby about this type of literacy. I try not to. Sometimes I shake my head at people who not only haven't read philosophy, but don't recognise major names like David Hume and Immanuel Kant. I shouldn't; I can't even legitimately say that it's done me one damn bit of good to read philosophy. And by the same token, I can enjoy South Park or Beavis and Butt-head just as much as I can enjoy a volume of Jung or . I'm a big Stephen King fan, which causes many "literate" people to recoil in disgust. Why? Because Shakespeare is somehow a "better" writer than King? Shakespeare reflected the times, and wrote for the common people. Well, so does King. Sorry, /argumentum ad antiquatem/ (argument of antiquity: "it is old, it must be right") doesn't hold much water for me. The razor I use -- reference books -- is becoming less and less useful. Modern reference materials are search engines and collated database collections, not twelve-pound stacks of onionskin paper. Why would you search through a sequential medium, when so much software can perform a binary search and come back with your answer in virtually no time at all? Well, call me a romantic. Shakespeare doesn't really have much purpose in modern life, either, but I like reading his work. I also like the feel of a book in my hands, probably because I have fond memories of libraries and just enjoy the way old books smell. Computers are sometimes so *sterile*. What? Yes, I know how to use a slide rule. Um... yeah, right here in my desk drawer. Why do you ask? ;) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Caliban Tiresias Darklock | "I'm not sorry or Darklock Communications | ashamed of who I PGP Key AD21EE50 at | really am." FREE KEVIN MITNICK! | - Charles Manson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 19:13:36 -0500 From: "Joe Shambro" Subject: Re: [mitnick] has there been any response? But don't expect lawmakers to be sympathetic. I personally would find it hard being sympathetic to him if not for him being in prison so long. He did something wrong, didn't he? Exactly. - -Joe - -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Joubert To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Friday, September 25, 1998 7:11 PM Subject: Re: [mitnick] has there been any response? >I got a response from my congressman in Colorado. It was not a form letter. >I was a personalized letter and it actually looks like they did some >research on Mitnick before they replied. The letter included some info about >what Kevin was charged with and how much damage his is accused of causing. > >It was basically unsympathetic but at least it wasn't a form letter. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: teo82@ix.netcom.com >To: mitnick@2600.com >Date: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 8:37 PM >Subject: [mitnick] has there been any response? > > >>I have sent several letters to my senator and my reps, but have yet to >recieve any reply not even >>a form letter. i sent the first letter almost two weeks ago and I'm quite >mad that i didn't get a >>reply. anyone else not get replies from their congress person. >> >>Thomas E. O'Grady A.K.A. Crazed Dante >> >>Teo82@ix.netcom.com or Rascal14@aol.com >> > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 18:03:05 -0600 From: "Kevin Joubert" Subject: [mitnick] Mitnick Merchandise!!! PLEASE READ!!!!!!! Ok. Sorry it has taken me so long to update everyone but its been hectic. I still don't have pictures yet, but should have some soon. Telephreak has been gracious enough to create and host a web page with info on the Mitnick Merchandise. The URL is: http://members.xoom.com/TelePhreak/merch.html There is a price list and ordering info there. There is also an order form that can be printed out, filled in and mailed to me. The price list is accurate except for a couple of things: Ink Pens: they are $1 each and not $.80 each. Pencils: they are $.50 each and not $.40 each. The coffee mugs are still iffy so if anyone wants some of them please just email me and let me know. DON'T send me any money for them yet. Just email me that you will want them and how many and when I get enough interest to cover the expense of ordering (which would be about 30 mugs) then I will order them. Polo shirts can be done. I will do those to order and there will be a little more lead time. Lemme know if you want gold with black logo or black with white logo. Tee shirts and pens and pencils are on the way. Anyone ordering now should keep it to pens, pencils and T-shirts and polos right now. I was at the guys house last night and he let me try my hand at silkscreening a black one. IT WAS GREAT! The white is almost flourescent against the black and it looks great. The gold shirts we got were too yellow so we are taking them back and getting some others tonite. I should have everything in full production next week so everyone SEND YOUR ORDERS NOW. It will take about 7-10 days to process the orders and get them to you after I receive your order. Send checks and money orders only. Email me with any questions. Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 17:36:08 -0700 From: The Bri Man Subject: [mitnick] Editorials Whats up all? i sent a letter to the editor at my local newspaper, and i just got a call confirming that i sent it, as well as that they are going to publish it in tomorrow's paper!!! And also, any of you that know Bonq (terabyte@home.com), we are gonna go pass out some flyers at the mall tomorrow. Just to clue ya in, latez... *BRaiN KaNDy* ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 17:41:37 -0700 From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack On 04:46 PM 9/25/98 -0700, I personally witnessed Caliban Tiresias Darklock jumping up to say: > >as much as I can enjoy a volume of Jung or . I was going to say Freud here, but I decided not to after I typed it because I really don't much enjoy Freud. So I removed it, and was going to replace it with someone else, but my mind ran off with me and I forgot. Sorry for the interruption, but it really annoyed me that I did this and thought I should explain before anyone started going "What the hell?" ;) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Caliban Tiresias Darklock | "I'm not sorry or Darklock Communications | ashamed of who I PGP Key AD21EE50 at | really am." FREE KEVIN MITNICK! | - Charles Manson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 21:13:22 -0400 From: kerry Subject: [mitnick] Need your help! Pls read me! You don't have to be a stockholder or a financial expert to help with this. For a while now we've been adding financial reports for the corporations named in the govt's case against Kevin to his site. People have been very helpful in locating this info, but thus far we haven't been able to discern any more detailed information on losses reported by the companies for late 1993 and early 1994. We need to know: Have there ever been any press releases, reports to stockholders or info in the media concerning said losses? There may even be info on the net somewhere. And if any of you are are experienced at interpreting profit/loss reports -- do they tell us anything about the losses for which Kevin is allegedly responsible? This is extremely important - if the prosecution is hell-bent on hyping the charges against him and maintaining that he's somehow done millions of dollars of damage (yet he came out of it with no profit or gain, and none of those companies fared very badly, despite their alleged losses), we have to point out every weakness we can in the case. The trial date is not far off at all, so we need to act now. I know that Kevin appreciates the support (thru legal means :) people on this list have given, although he can't say anything himself (since anything he says can be used against him later). He did tell me to say hi to everybody on the list. Financial documents indicating profit and loss for this time period (last quarter of 1993 thru 2nd quarters of 1994) can be found at http://www.kevinmitnick.com/cory.html. Such losses are required by law to be reported to the SEC, so they should show up somewhere here - -- unless they're false or exaggerated. In cases like these, companies can get away with claiming whatever losses they please, since they consider their property "stolen" even if they leave their network unsecured and someone gets onto their system and damages nothing. We want to see proof that they suffered these losses, and if there is no such proof, their stockholders will definitely want to know about it; that is grounds for a lawsuit. If any of you can take a look at some of those financial documents, or do some searching around on net search engines and any sources of corporate stock/financial info, it'd be most helpful. If you come across additional documents we do not have, please send them to us. Thanks! kerry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 19:46:39 -0700 From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock Subject: Re: [mitnick] Editorials On 05:36 PM 9/25/98 -0700, I personally witnessed The Bri Man jumping up to say: > > Hey! Don't we have enough trouble informing the public without misspelled URLs?! ;) - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Caliban Tiresias Darklock | "I'm not sorry or Darklock Communications | ashamed of who I PGP Key AD21EE50 at | really am." FREE KEVIN MITNICK! | - Charles Manson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 22:59:02 EDT From: Bobwil623@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] Re:has there been any response? - followup! > I got a response from my congressman in > Colorado. It was not a form letter. I was a > personalized letter and it actually looks like > they did some research on Mitnick before they > replied. The letter included some info about > what Kevin was charged with and how much damage > his is accused of causing. > > It was basically unsympathetic but at least it > wasn't a form letter... wonderful! now you've got the opportunity to start a dialog. it's not just you preaching, and it's not just the congressperson rebutting. here's an example of how to frame a response to the congressperson: Hon. Representative Hon. Representative : Thank you for taking the time to address my concerns about the human rights violations being suffered by Kevin Mitnick in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Detention Center . It's reassuring to know that my elected representative shares my concerns about a man who's been accused of a crime but who has not been afforded a bail hearing (a violation of the 4th and 6th Amendments to the Constitution) Unfortunately, the reports as published by John Markoff in the New York Times immediately prior to Kevin Mitnick's arrest had a terribly sensationalizing effect on Mr. Mitnick's treatment following his arrest. Indeed, The Nation magazine ran an in-depth analysis of the several ways in which Mr. Markoff's reports apparently violated several conventional journalistic standards, as well as standards used by the New York Times itself to govern the actions of its reporters and editors. Mr. Markoff demonstrated a most dramatic departure from conventional assumptions that someone accused of a crime is "innocent until proven guilty" as he wrote supposedly "in-depth" descriptions of things Mr. Mitnick "did," but without any disclaimer that these were allegations against Mr. Mitnick, and were essentially fictionalized by Mr. Markoff based on interviews with people unconnected with Mr. Mitnick in any way. Mr. Markoff's sensationalistic reporting and ignorance of assumptions of innocence on the part of the accused has dramatically altered public perception -- and governmental treatment -- of Mr. Mitnick. To the best of my knowledge, no other prisoner in the United States has been held longer without being granted a bail hearing -- note the distinction between not being granted a bail hearing and not being granted bail. The distinction is as dramatic as Mr. Markoff's sensationalized, inaccurate reporting. My most serious worry concerns reports (as yet unconfirmed) that the U.S. Attorney on the case has refused to provide defense counsel access to the prosecution's evidence against Mr. Mitnick unless and until Mr. Mitnick signs an agreement that waives any and all rights that he may have to discuss the circumstances of his case publicly. Again, thank you for your response to my previous letter. I would greatly appreciate hearing your reaction to the concerns I've raised above. Regards, ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 21:11:37 -0600 From: "Kevin Joubert" Subject: Re: [mitnick] has there been any response? Joe, The fact that he has been imprisoned for so long IS the only reason the majority of people are standing up for him at all. No one here is saying that what he did was not illegal. Some of us believe his crimes were somewhere on par with: a) doing 5 miles over the posted speed limit b) keeping the extra change the cashier at the mini-mart gave you by mistake c) etc. etc. etc. I don't expect anyone to be "sympathetic" with the fact that he got caught breaking the law. But, I do expect my elected officials to be absolutely OUTRAGED at the way that Kevin has been treated since his arrest. (As a matter of fact, I expect them to be outraged at the way he was arrested as well. ) I expect the same from everyone out there who has half a brain and knows anything about the fundamental principles that this nation was founded on. I just can't believe how many people out there think its okay for the fucking government to do whatever the hell they wanted to you because you get arrested. I just can't believe it. Everyday I look around and see that shit I get a clearer picture for how some of the world's worst tragedies have occured. PEOPLE! WAKE THE FUCK UP! Kevin - -----Original Message----- From: Joe Shambro To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Friday, September 25, 1998 6:31 PM Subject: Re: [mitnick] has there been any response? >But don't expect lawmakers to be sympathetic. I personally would find it >hard being sympathetic to him if not for him being in prison so long. He >did something wrong, didn't he? Exactly. > >-Joe ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 21:34:09 -0600 From: "Kevin Joubert" Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack - -----Original Message----- From: Dan Sissman To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Friday, September 25, 1998 11:02 AM Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack >Is it *ever* right for someone to hack someone >else's web page? >If so, what circumstances justify such action? I feel that true hackers have an ethical responsibility to use there skills to improve society and computer technology in general. If by engaging in NON-destructive hacking of a website, the a portion of the public can be made aware of political injustice that the lame-ass media refuses to cover due to its lack of sensationalism, then I say GO FOR IT. If by engaging in NON-destructive hacking others can be made aware of the inadequacies of their computer network then I say GO FOR IT. As far as destructive hacking goes: If I met a child pornographer in person, I would probably kick his ass. So as far as I am concerned he is getting off easy by just having his website crashed. The fact that these acts are not approved by federal, state, or local governments have NO bearing on their value to society and the computer industry. Is it "right" to commit such acts? I have no fucking idea what "right" means. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 21:37:44 -0600 From: "Kevin Joubert" Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack - -----Original Message----- From: Dan Sissman To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Friday, September 25, 1998 10:18 AM Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack >No, the truth is, he was wrong. "Hackers are losers" is quite clearly an opinion, >and however much we on this list may disagree, he has an absolute right to print >that opinion. This doesn't change the fact that Mr. Hanback said "Mitnick, a >notorious 'cyberthief,' broke into the home computer of one of the world's leading >computer-security experts." Note the conspicuous absence of the word >"allegedly". I also note the conspicuous abscence of the word "alleged" when when describing Shimo as "one of the world's leading computer-security experts". GAG, GAG, VOMIT!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 21:55:15 -0600 From: "Kevin Joubert" Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack - -----Original Message----- From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Friday, September 25, 1998 4:20 AM Subject: Re: [mitnick] The result from the HFG web page hack >My own personal distinction of whether action X is ethical or not is as >follows: "If I were that person/entity and someone did this to me, would I >be willing to accept that as fair?" If the answer comes back "yes", then >it's ethical. If it comes back "no", it's not Forgive me but your personal distinction sucks. : ) No one wants anything unpleasant done to them no matter how ethical, just, or "fair" it is. > >I think terrorism is an excellent description of what they did, myself. >They took action against a perceived power structure by force for the >purpose of making a political statement. No. The very word "terrorism" is derived from the the word "terror". Terrorism has the expressed purpose of inflicting terror. Some persons known as "terrorists" use terrorism to make a political statement. That doesn't make all acts of defiance against authority acts of terrorism. > >>No, this is an old-fashioned ethical idea: that with power comes a >>responsibility to refrain from hurting people with that power. > > >I thought the responsibility to refrain from hurting people came with being >human. Call me a romantic. I'll call you naive. Humans are beasts. Intelligent beasts I grant you but horrible, violent, brutal beasts none-the-less. Here is a test. Get yourself I good stout piece of pipe or a baseball bat or maybe an axe-handle or something like that. Get a group of friends together and toss the "device" to each one of them and ask them to just tell you the very first thing that comes to their minds. I guarantee you that fewer than 1 out of 10 of them will say something like, "Man I could really build something to help my fellow man with this thing". hahahhah. No. the VAST majority will feel the weight of whatever is in their hands and think, "Man, I could really fuck something up with this". Beasts. Violent beasts. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 21:04:19 -0700 From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock Subject: Re: [mitnick] has there been any response? On 09:11 PM 9/25/98 -0600, I personally witnessed Kevin Joubert jumping up to say: > >I don't expect anyone to be "sympathetic" with the fact that he got caught >breaking the law. Not a fact, just yet... careful on that. The evidence I've seen is rather less than compelling. Do I think someone who did the things they say Kevin did belongs in jail? Yes. Whether Kevin did them is something I am not in a position to determine. >But, I do expect my elected officials to be absolutely >OUTRAGED at the way that Kevin has been treated since his arrest. [...] >I expect the same from everyone out there who has half a brain and >knows anything about the fundamental principles that this nation was founded >on. I agree with you one thousand percent on this. It's not his arrest we're protesting, as much as the violation of his fundamental right to fair trial. I think this is a distinction that the media has not quite picked up on from our previous communications. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Caliban Tiresias Darklock | "I'm not sorry or Darklock Communications | ashamed of who I PGP Key AD21EE50 at | really am." FREE KEVIN MITNICK! | - Charles Manson ------------------------------ End of mitnick-digest V1 #166 *****************************